From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QNcpd-0003CP-7E for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 21 May 2011 03:26:25 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D19E51C003; Sat, 21 May 2011 03:24:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yi0-f53.google.com (mail-yi0-f53.google.com [209.85.218.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 99C001C003 for ; Sat, 21 May 2011 03:24:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yia25 with SMTP id 25so2012497yia.40 for ; Fri, 20 May 2011 20:24:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to :references:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition :content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=fhATrW23Dcc9MNlT+p/f45S4ZDCVOUZej+Gl7vqlG7s=; b=kXh2dsQCm8ygs13eFSVAIOpejUv/qSEPMh23o8WrrlyUICjV/vX7gPdGtpVzfcdrmL FBJ0cYtgiNATq2tw0DSJspKChRg6JglBeMg0XpLTVzr9uvmuntqvn2qEUl7rCQORB0xq tUFKYaHVU5m7gns3Ont+QrEXcPdnQzHWqnN9I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:content-transfer-encoding :in-reply-to:user-agent; b=YwzCI+b24O8sGIjHvIBh08iwvF3fWbOsZplyvNHzcH7sVAv3S2gGja1ZCZyfqjoGlo gwh843yLgmseXKEqDJuQL27WRhs28wh/C2fBI0yUBToLJ9pSGYv4L/bYX13ynF260Xs8 Tte07kjXR+geh+7QtfzxA7eS8NSVXhvzdaJ/o= Received: by 10.236.190.137 with SMTP id e9mr357183yhn.440.1305948276932; Fri, 20 May 2011 20:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gaurahari.merseine.nu (adsl-72-152-78-99.asm.bellsouth.net [72.152.78.99]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id u33sm1925060yhn.60.2011.05.20.20.24.36 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Fri, 20 May 2011 20:24:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 20 May 2011 23:24:33 -0400 From: Indi To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] [HEADSUP] libreoffice versus bison-2.5 Message-ID: <20110521032432.GA28631@gaurahari.merseine.nu> References: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 80544aab17a95a2ea8646a23b8c3577e On Sat, May 21, 2011 at 12:50:01AM +0200, walt wrote: > I'm surprised that this problem hasn't already been posted here. >=20 > For you users of unstable gentoo: the recent update of 'icu' broke > dozens of packages (as it always does) including libreoffice. >=20 > The problem is that libreoffice fails to build if you have bison-2.5 > installed on your machine. A gentoo bug report was filed by our own > Nikos Chantziaras -- who did not post a headsup to this list :p >=20 > The fix is to downgrade bison to the 'stable' version 2.4.3, as stated > in Nikos's bug report. >=20 > Happy week-end to all :) Thanks for that. I upgraded my ~x86 laptop today and a bunch of things did break but revdep-rebuild appears to have handled it. I have bison-2.5, but am using libreoffice-bin which seems fine.=20 --=20 caveat utilitor=20 =E2=99=AB =E2=9D=A4 =E2=99=AB =E2=9D=A4 =E2=99=AB =E2=9D=A4 =E2=99=AB=20